25 Years Ago! Part VIII! Replicants And Mr. Spider-Head On June 25, 1982...

Merrick here...
It’s June 25th, 2007. Exactly 25 years ago…today…a film called BLADE RUNNER showed us the world of 2019. A world where “Spinner” vehicles lifted skyward from bustling streets to skim the aerial traffic ways of Los Angeles. A time when constructed life forms…who were “more human than human”…bore the brunt of the danger during mankind’s off world colonization movement. A place that was peculiarly beautiful, even at its ugliest.
2019.
That’s only twelve years away now. There are no flying cars and there probably won’t be anytime soon (although we’re getting closer). We’re not building people yet - we won’t be for some time, if ever. The notion of offworld colonization within the lifetime of anyone reading these words FEELS more and more improbable as the years go by. And, perhaps most disappointingly, cinema’s “worlds of tomorrow” have become decreasingly fantastical. With a few exceptions, the “future” brought to us by movies these days seems far less amazing than it used to – there’s less mystery awaiting us, less majesty to behold. It’s rarely awe-inspiring, and is often disappointingly similar to the world we already know…too similar to be much fun. Increasingly, Science Fiction cinema lacks wonder.
I’ve been unable to locate the first trailer I recall seeing for BLADE RUNNER – I’m not sure it’s actually available on the Net. But it went something like this:

(love that Pac-Man "wakka" crescendo at the end of the trailer!)
I was fourteen years old when I first saw a trailer for the film. Truthfully, I didn’t know what the hell I was looking at. I knew Ridley Scott from ALIEN back in ’79. It was one of my favorite films, so this had to be some kind of cool…right? I knew it had been on the cover of a STARLOG magazine. I knew it had Han Solo / Indiana Jones in it, and I remembered Vangelis from CHARIOTS OF FIRE. Oh yeah: that Douglas Trumbull guy made pretty okay effects, too. This was going to be incredible. It HAD to be incredible. How could it not be? There was no way it couldn’t be.
I saw it. And…it wasn’t incredible. It was a busy film. Cold, distant, unpleasant, alienating. I didn’t “get” what Vangelis was doing. Indy looked like he was sleepwalking. The heart of the film seemed buried to me – but Zhora’s titties were cool & I wondered what they felt like.
THAT’s what I took away from BLADE RUNNER the first time I watched it. Clearly I had some growing up to do.
Which happened.
Over the years, I changed. My understanding changed. My perspective on life and how we relate to the world around us changed. And, after a while, I began to comprehend the truths director Ridely Scott and scripters Hampton Fancher and David Peoples put on screen back in 1982. As I became more complicated, I began to understand BLADE RUNNER’s complexity.
BLADE RUNNER had, in actuality, none of the negative qualities I initially believed it to have (and Zhora’s titties remained a blessed constant). It wasn’t a cold film, it wasn’t a heartless story, nor was it a tale devoid of ideas. It simply served these qualities in a package I wasn’t capable of grasping at the time, by deploying conceits I wasn’t awake enough to appreciate at the time.
Now…I get it. In a real sense, BLADE RUNNER has helped to shape, and inform, many elements of my creativity…as well as my overall perspective.
The film’s nuance is so clear to me now that I can’t believe it ever eluded me to begin with. More than Jordan Cronenewth’s breathtaking photography or Trumbull’s sweeping visual effects…BLADE RUNNER’s greatest power lay in its ideas:
** The idea that the “badguys” in the film aren’t bent on world domination, or the attainment of riches. Their “crime” was that they are desperate…and would do anything…to live. The fugitives being sought by Harrison Ford’s character were born with a limited life span. But in their four years of existence, they’d lived more meaningful lives & enjoyed far richer experiences than some people manage over decades…and they didn’t want to let go. To some extent, BLADE RUNNER is a film about killing – but in being so, it is ultimately a potent exaltation of life.
** The idea that our “hero” (perhaps “protagonist” is a better word in this instance) was trying to KILL people who just wanted to live – people whose death warrant was written only by virtue of their being born. Sure they did wrong things, but they did wrong things for reasons most of us could understand. The desire to survive, after all, is a strong motivator. For the unenlightened in BLADE RUNNER, creatures with beauty, talent, a sense of place, and searching for belonging deserved to be shot in the back on a rainy street like an unwanted animal. Those who truly understood...would never allow for this to happen:

** Perhaps most disquieting notion is the possibility that our “protagonist” might, in actuality, be the exact same kind of person he was sent to kill. By acting against the fugitives, he’s also (symbolically) turning his back on his own self, and his own essence -- and the tragedy is he might not know it. This element is highly contested to this day. And, based on past Talkbacks, it’s still a source of uncertainty / contention for many readers. But, there are certainly allusions that Harrison Ford is a “Replicant “ in the film. And, after all, there are the words of Ridley Scott himself:

Where THE WRATH OF KHAN helped me to comprehend the pain brought about by the physical passing of a loved one, BLADE RUNNER helped me to define death’s more esoteric context. Simply. Vividly. Frighteningly. Unforgettably.
In the end, BLADE RUNNER isn’t necessarily about physical death – it’s about the loss of hopes, dreams, experiences, memories, and ideals that physical death brings with it. It’s about the simple, gut-wrenching truth that the beauty we see around us, the love we feel for ourselves or others, and the moments we most cherish will never be understood by others...can never be appreciated by others as fully as we appreciate them...and may simply vanish completely when our bodies stop working.

Is this a downer? At face value…yes. It’s a rather bleak and nihilistic view of The Way of Things. But when you think about, it’s not really grim at all. Perhaps BLADE RUNNER might best be seen as a call for self-empowerment, self-awareness, and self-appreciation. We can share many, many elements of our lives with others. But, in the end, each of us experiences uniquely, appreciates uniquely, and sees through unique eyes.
For me, at least, BLADE RUNNER says that what we carry with us…and who we are inside…is more valuable than any of the trappings by which we define ourselves on a daily basis. Like nearly every character in the film, perhaps the greatest challenge most of us will ever face is a deceptively simple one: make every moment count.
If a bunch of uppity Replicants can figure this out, why can’t we all?

On the same day BLADE RUNNER opened, John Carpenter’s THE THING came around.

What I most remember about THE THING is the profound disappointment I felt when my father…a huge fan of the original film as well as John W. Campbell Jr.’s source material…didn’t actually go with me to see the damn movie. He must have seen it at some point, but I don’t recall our seeing it together. Strange.
THE THING, as it happened, would be the first horror movie I’d see alone. And, what an experience it was. A brooding examination of paranoia that was unapologetically grotesque and unrelentingly bleak – THE THING sent my youthful mind spinning. As much as I cherish dogs, to this day I can not look at a pooch without sensing the briefest flash of this:

I love THE THING. I love all early Carpenter until his career went South (and never came home) after THEY LIVE. Early Carpenter….what I call “The Dean Cundey Years” (a reference to the Director of Photography Carpenter partnered with between HALLOWEEN and BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA)…had loads of class, gobs of style. And, for me at least, his films were the very embodiment of “cool”. THE THING fit right in with all Carpenter that had come before. It was everything I expected it to be…and more.
The notion of friends suddenly ceasing to be our friends when co-opted by external forces was new to me at the time (I now recognize it as a frequently deployed SF conceit)…I seem to recall having trust issues for months after seeing this film. The reality that “good guys” don’t always fight to a decisive victory also stirred me. At the end of the day, no matter how hard we try &how much crap we go through – we could still end up alone. Or, worse yet, with someone we can not trust. Thanks for the happy, shiny life lesson John.
I saw parts of the THE THING on DVD a few weeks ago; I’m not sure it holds up as well as I’d like it too. Rob Bottin’s effects look a little less convincing than they used to – Mr. Spider-Head doesn’t creep out the way he used to.
The tension that worked so well 25 years ago feels a little too over-the-top now. Its thematics still work though, and work well.
But, do I think this film should be remade, which has recently been indicated? No – at least not yet. Although, I understand that the oft-referenced “remake” is…actually… something of a prequel (focusing on the Norwegian team who discovered the downed spacecraft & brings the alien back to their base – this served as backstory in Carpenter’s film). So, maybe there’s a way to have our cake and eat it too. Maybe we’ll get a THING project that can update the concept’s presentation while not stomping on what Carpenter so carefully, lovingly created.
I’m intrigued that two movies of such unrelenting atmosphere, that are so thick on subtext, endure to this day – but this should also come as no surprise. Both films are about far more than the face value of what’s onscreen, and both challenge us to look into ourselves to fully appreciate the stories they’re telling. Movies like BLADE RUNNER and THE THING rarely come around anymore, and are especially sidestepped by a Hollywood system that often doesn’t deem its audience capable of, or willing to, think. Ironically, BLADE RUNNER and THE THING endure because they gave their viewers credit, and resonate far beyond mere spectacle.
Think about all the movies that will release this Summer, and ask yourself what you…or sites like AICN…will likely to be discussing 25 years from now. What will be noteworthy this Summer? What will be remembered? And, why? From where I’m sitting, I’d say candidates are a precious few. And that’s sad, really. It doesn’t need to be this way.

I pop the DVD in, maybe once a year. You have to watch it front to back, much like Blade Runner, for it to work it's magic on you. The effects the claustrophobia, the paranoia, all of it. It comes right back after about 10 minutes. You cannot possibly improve upon Carpenter's version. Updated effects? Totally unnecessary. CGI would just look fake. There was an otherworldly-ness to the way the monster moved and the sounds that it made that you'll never be able to reproduce to the same effect digitally.

If anyone remakes this movie, CGI's everything and squeezes it into a PG13 bag, I will kill them. CGI has no weight on screen, and definetly can't be scary, so stop trying, and start calling Tom Savini again.

It's always great to see films of this caliber get the praise they deserve. BLADE RUNNER has gained so much in its appeal as its ideas and influence have become increasingly recognized. And Carpenter's THE THING will always be a classic.<P>As for Deckard being a Replicant, I'm one of those who is opposed to this concept. It feels like too much of a cop-out and creates inconsistencies that the film is unable to account for. (Perhaps Ridley's "Final Cut" will add more to this growing debate.)<P>And yes, Vangelis's score for BLADE RUNNER is one of the greatest ever recorded. Although it's largely synth-based, it manages to sound completely organic with a very rich tone. It contains some of the most beautiful pieces I've ever heard in a film.<P>"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe..."

Saw the ad on the AFI 100 Best Films show. Can't have too many cuts of Bladerunner I guess. Still, I feel the need to get yet another version of a film I must have 10 different copies of.
Hey, why hasn't there been anything about Blockbuster siding with BluRay? I hate Blockbuster and wouldn't rent from them under any circumstances, but is the the death knell for HD DVD? BTW, watched Mad Max II the other day on HD DVD and it never looked so good.

Only about 10% of the novel is in the film. In fact, the words 'blade runner' aren't even in the novel. William Burroughs coined the term. <p> I believe the idea of Deckard being a replicant stems from a continuity error regarding the number of replicants Deckard is supposed to be after,. In other words, a forced layer brought upon by a mistake. <p> In the novel, that idea would undermine everything Dick's story stands for - his life long questioning of 'what is human?' & 'what is reality?' which he does in the novel through a metaphor of a human's relationship with machines (more human than human) and all the falseness and artificiality that surrounds him. <p> The novel is about empathy. Which is what grounds Deckard, and the rest of humanity to the human condition, by artifical means - an interactive 'TV show' where a character's physical pain, a man who approaches martyrdom, can be felt by all who participate as witnesses. <p> It's a really complex and well written novel. It's a shame, as good as the film Blade Runner' is, that it completely missed the target of getting Dick's story across. It didn't even get the plot points right.

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial. Talk about a good week for movies! But as a result, The Thing and Blade Runner got their asses handed to them at the box office. Oh, and Fantastic Four finished 3rd this week. God does exist.

He is. Without doubt. And I like that fact.
Secondly you can't bitch about the film raping the book. One is called Do androids dream of electric sheep and the other is Bladerunner.
It obvious that they were using the novel for it's very basic ideas. If you try and compare you're foolish.
I love both book and film

This is a later trailer, the first had no dialogue and just played "If I Didn't Care" by the great Ink Spots. It played for many many weeks in advance of the film and was one of the best there was of that fun era. By the way, 1984 was an even greater year we all remember well--- Temple of Doom, Search for Spock, The Natural, Ghostbusters, Greystoke, Splash, Gremlins, Romancing The Stone, The Terminator-- and many more--- they had to release early there were so many for summer.

The book isn't that great. People like to think that since they spend time reading it, that somehow warrants giving it high praise. Well just because they are words on a page instead of images on a screen doesn't mean the final effect is better. In fact it isn't. The film has the book beat in terms of style--the tone is precise and speaks more directly to the themes, the acting / dialogue also relates to the themes better than in the novel. Some interesting insights in the book that don't exist in the movie, granted. But they are two separate entities, and the book just isn't that good of a book, while the movie is crafted much more finely.

WE grew up in one of the greatest eras in cinema history. I can not think of any recent film that inspires on the level of what the 70s and 80s offered. What are kids going to remember from the 90s and early 2000s? The birth of cgi and bigger and bigger explosions in slick packages with no soul.

Fortunately there are still made movies today with many of the same qualities as these classics. Darren Aranofsky is one of those few directors. Blade Runner is probably my all time favorite movie, but the best movie in years is the Fountain, and im sure it will be one of those misunderstood classics that we will all reminisce about 20 years from now.
Oh and Ridley should start making some more Sci-fi..
thx for the write-up Merrick!

I just read an interview with Harrison Ford in which he describes a conflict between he and Ridley Scott. According to Ford, Scott believed that Decker was a replicant and Ford disagreed. He noted that this dispute made sense within the context of the film, because Decker did not believe himself to be a replicant and would have strenuously resisted the idea.

You make good points about the book (i.e. empathy...although the film does capture this if you're looking for it). When I first read it many years ago, I was rather surprised at how different it was from the film. There are a lot of details that the film doesn't even bother to include or address. That being said, I actually prefer the film over the book. I feel it works better as a story while the images and atmosphere stay with you long afterwards.

Can't wait for Blade Runner Final Cut, especially if the cinema release is still on. If there are 3 films that MUST be seen in the cinema they are 2001, Lawrence of Arabia and Blade Runner. The Thing still kicks ass too. "Supply window!!!!"

I read somewhere that the final dvd is going to be released in October. I hope it does. Isnt it supposed to have the the director's cut and the original theatrical version on it? I've always loved the voice-over by Ford, but I guess Scott and a whole bunch of other folks didnt like it.

And be 60 feet long, as the result of genetic experiments. And it will now star Skeet Ulrich as Chief Brody. "Skeet: will be reunited with his "Chill Factor" director Hugh Johnson, who is taking over for Tim Story

I've seen a lot of scary shit over the years, but after I saw The Thing a few years ago for the first time, I couldn't sleep! It scared the shit out of me! (I was 21 years old back then). The visual effects, the sound effects, everything was so damn fucking scary! <br>
There were other films, like Alien, The Descent or The Exorcist, which were pretty scary and intense too, but only The Thing was able to ruin 2 1/2 nights for me!<br>
A goddamn masterpiece!

Excellent write up. I've never felt compelled to post on AICN before, but your thoughts on Blade Runner are so very similar to my experience with the film, I had to respond. I, too, did not understand the film when I first saw (I was only 10!!), but years later I realized how truly brilliant the film was. It is now among my top 5 favorite movies of all time and will likely always remain so. Thank you for sharing your thoughts Merrick.

I love that movie with a fiery passion, but interestingly, my first viewing of the film was similar to Merrick's initial viewing. I had heard so much about the movie (being younger, I saw it for the first time on video) and I had high expectations for this stylized sci-fi flick. When I discovered that the movie was a slow, brooding tale with a ponderous speech and a slow-motion dove at the end, I was pretty damn disappointed. I was under the impression I was going to get something else and so I pounced on the supposed "classic" when it wasn't what I then wanted it to be. But oddly enough, I still found myself drawn to the movie. A while later, during one of my regular DVD-shopping trips, I spotted a "Director's Cut" of the flick and picked it up. I read about it and noted the cheap price. On a whim, I decided to buy it. I usually only spent my money on movies I really badly wanted in my collection, but for some reason, I bought "Blade Runner." One of the selling points for me was that this "Director's Cut" had a new ending, which sounded enticing to me, so I took it home and immediately popped it into my DVD player and skipped to the end. Suddenly, I found myself listening to Rutger Hauer's speech as if for the first time. It was one of the most perfectly written and delivered movie speeches I had ever witnessed. Every line, every idea, opened up my mind and imagination and all I could think was "how the hell did I not LOVE this movie before?" It turned out that this "Director's Cut" was the same version I had seen before and there wasn't a damn new thing about it. Instead of seeing some new stuff that helped alter my perspective, I was falling in love with the ending I had seen before, seeing it through new eyes. It was a really strange experience, how it all worked out, but I'm so glad I gave the movie that second chance. Because it blew me away. After watching the scene where Hauer gives his amazing speech in the rain, I ended up watching the entire movie again and my love for it only grew. I thank Ridley Scott and everyone involved for bringing this glorious movie to life.

CHILDREN OF MEN is an incredible frakkin' movie. But it also has the advantage being made more recently with a more current worldwide perspective.<P>Had BLADE RUNNER incorporated more of the details from "Do Androids Dream..." (i.e. a World War that killed millions, ash everywhere, mass extinction, those confined to living on Earth rather than off-world, etc.) it would have more than given COM a run for its money in terms of the portrayal of a dystopian society.<P>In my opinion, BLADE RUNNER is less about the direction of society than it is about questions of morality = At what point does something become human?<P>No matter what, both films are fantastic.

EJ Olmos' character leaves a foil unicorn outside Deckard's door. Deckard had dreams about a unicorn. Olmos was telling him he knows he is a replicant because he knows what was programmed into his head. He just decided to let him live. Indisputable.

Ace Hunter owned! Can you believe the local newspaper had the nerve to use "MEGA FLOP" as the title of their review of Megaforce?! Hacks, the lot of them. Hey, did Howard the Duck come out that year too? Another lost classic.

I had to buy a region 2 dvd to replace my worn out VHS. Now when I mean awesome....I mean awesomely bad. Bad acting, direction, poorly filmed action sequences, terrible one liners...and the fucking flying bike! This is one of the GREAT drunk party movies. Ive seen it a hundred times probably. Its crazy as a kid I thought it was a good movie. Then in my 20's I saw it again and realized what it really is. A cult camp comedy masquerading as a action movie. Barry Bostwick (yes the mayor from that Michael J Fox sitcom) is Ace Hunter the leader of Megaforce. That alone is worth the price of admission.
Ill finish with this classic exchange between Ace and Dallas...
Dallas: Well, I know how you feel, and I've been there myself. Let me see. One time before I made a jump into the night, an old buddy of mine told me something that made me feel a whole lot better.
Ace Hunter: What, what did he tell you to do?
Dallas: Well, he said, "You love 'em in blue and you love them in red. But most of all you love them in blue."
Ace Hunter: That's totally inapplicable to anything that's going on here. And it's _dumb_. Who told you that?
Dallas: You did!
Ace Hunter: But it's very wise. Very wise.

get's made today. because until we do no one will ever make another Blade Runner or The Thing but instead keep churning out unwatchable garbage like Underworld or Ghost Rider. The directors of yore, the Carpenters and the Spielbergs, simply aren't doing genre (at least not well) anymore but until the public creates an atmosphere that convinces the studio they want more than mindless, Bay-esque, ultra choppy, poorly directed explosions that is all we are going to get. Thank you Merrick for such wonderful retrospectives that will hopefully wake some up to how far down the rabbit hole we have gotten in terms of quality. For Christ sake nearly ever defender of Transformers can't form a more coherent argument than "It's got giant robots and that's all it needs." And in their heads that is actually some sort of twisted excuse. Sad sad times.

Wrote the following in response to this statement
"The book was better. It always is." about LOTR Return of the King...
Have you ever seen Blade Runner? If so, have you read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"? If so, can you honestly say that Phillip K. Dick's novel is better than Ridley Scott's movie?
I know it's an exception to the rule...but Blade Runner blows it's source material out of the water...
keep in mind my favorite book of all time (until i read SnowCrash) was A Scanner Darkly...PKD was a literary giant however Do Androids...? wasn't such a good read.
Gotter launder me Karma!

hijacking the Blade Runner talkback hahahahahahaha. Forgot to mention...The Thing is just the shit! Carpenter in the 80's was so awesome. But his scariest movie to me was Prince Of Darkness. I know its not his most popular but I love it. The dream sequence where they get contacted from the future. Or the touching of the mirror at the end. It still gets me. Also does anyone know if the Blade Runner with the voiceover is gonna be in the new set? Ive got a shitty avi with it...would like that version to complete the set.

...for me, it's a tough call which is better. As my above story explains, I fell in love with the "Director's Cut" before ever seeing the theatrical cut. Finally, years later, I hunted it down in a beat-up VHS copy from a little video store and loved it, too. The narration is great, but I don't know if it's necessary. And the "driving off into the sunset" bit doesn't really bug me, but then again, I don't miss it in the Director's Cut. So it really is a tough call for me which is better. They both share my favourite moments in the movie (Hauer's speech being my favourite bit of em all), so I'll just have to say I love em both.

I hate to be the lone voice of dissent, but I don't *love* Blade Runner. And I have seen it several times, and seen both versions. Sure; I recognise its importance. I can admire the film, maybe even appreciate it on some levels, but I just don't love it (with the exception of Vangelis’s score, which I own). I guess I have some of that growing up to do sometime. On the other hand, The Thing rules.

Oddly, I saw both of these films for the first time in about 1986, living at my Gran's in a sleepy village in Yorkshire; I was 14 at the time.<p>
As disturbing and challenging as they both are in their own different ways, I still consider them 'comfort films'. Living at my Gran's was one of the happiest times of my life, and when I saw the Thing, the village was undergoing one of the most snowy winters I'd ever seen, which tied in nicely with the setting of the Thing.<p>
I don't know why, but I identified with Blade Runner immediately, and it was already a 'cult classic' when I saw it. I fucking LOVED the whole atmosphere of it; hard to describe, but the whole film just seems 'warm' to me - despite the fact it pisses down continually throughout the film! The voice-over, the slightly 'off-kilter' acting, the soundtrack, and some of the most meaning-laden lines in history all combine to induce an almost trance-like state in me.<p>
I love both versions of Blade Runner; I loved Deckards voice-over, finding it almost soothing - and I liked the little insights he makes. I like the Director's Cut - voice-over removed - for simply having the balls to remove the voice-over and having long moments of contemplative silence, which the film does not suffer for.<p>
That said; if I had to choose, I'd take the original version each time.

With one punch, and then lights a cigar on ass and smokes over his limp body, and puts Sean Young on the back of his flying bike and takes her back to the Mega Force Compound for some hot monkey sex that will that replicant whore weak-kneed.

Y'all know what I'm talking about. There will never be a scene in a movie more shocking and terrifying than when that guy's chest splits open and those huge teeth bite off the doctor's arms. Never. No way. No How. I don't care what anyone says, no amount of CGI could ever improve upon it. Also, Blade Runner is the reason I went to film school and it's the reason I do special effects for a living, even more so than Star Wars.

The Thing became my favourite film the day that I saw it in 1983 (I was too young to see it at the cinema and had to wait for the videotape to be released), and it's stayed my favourite film for almost 25 years. I adore it, and I doubt I will ever find a film I love more. Very few films maintain the power to shock and disturb after repeated viewings and still less after a quarter of a century, but dammit doesn't it still hold up! I still smile every time I watch it and hear Garry's brilliant reading of that line. No, not "I know you gentlemen have been through a lot, but when you find the time I'd rather not spend the rest of this winter tied to this fucking couch!") but, "It's gooone, McReady"

One of the most hilarious and entertaining films ever made. Every person I show my VHS of it to has been sold on it big time much to their shock and dismay. When they release a HD edition of Ace Hunter and friends it will be a great, great day. *sheds a single tear*. By the way Mr_Incredible that 82 top ten box office list is pretty incredible. I remember that summer very vividly... all through movies.

Watch that film and you will sit there going "Man that guy had some serious work done." Great job Merrick. I never did like the voice-over for "BladeRunner". To my ear, it didn't match the performance in the film. Ford did the voice-over while working on Return of the Jedi and he sounded too much like Han Solo. As for the unicorn dream, that was added for the Director's Cut. That's not in any of the previous versions. There were 3-workprint, U.S. theatrical, and International theatrical. So originally the foil unicorn is a symbol for Rachel-"She's unique", like a unicorn. "The Thing"-best damn horror film ever.----later-----m

Not very good. Back in the UK in 1982 Blade Runner was rated AA (a cross between a PG13 and an R) but it somehow un-nerved me, just the rating alone. Here was Harrison Ford, Han Solo himself in a sci-fi film which wasn't Star Wars. There was no safety net of the Lucas universe here, I got it, it was ADULT, it wasn't kids Sci-fi. It made me worried. And worried in seeing an ADULT film where Han Solo wouldn't be able to wise crack himself out of danger. A friend of mine's Dad had apparently seen it, so I had to ask: "Does Harrison Ford Die in it?" "Er, don't know,” he said. "Oh, well… is it any good?" "My Dad says the Special Effects are good." And that was it. A week or so later I was hanging around in the lobby of the local cinema waiting for some kid friendly movie to start (it might have been ET, but I'm not sure), anyway Blade Runner was playing in Screen 2, nobody was about and my movie was a good few minutes away, so I decided to sneak into the Blade Runner screen and take a quick look. There I saw something which my young eyes didn't quite register, sure it was kinda cool, but it was Dark, too Dark for me to take on board. It was the opening industrial landscape shot of LA 2019. I was taken back, but not able to take it in, I felt this was definitely not for this kids eyes, so I left for the child friendly movie now showing upstairs. A few months later it arrived on video and everybody wanted to watch it. Myself included. Most of my friends had now seen it and said they liked the effects, but not much else. So now was my chance. And to be honest I got bored after the first ten minutes. What the hell was that rubbish all about? Boring. Slow. Dull. Why is everything pitch black? Just where was the sun? Fast forward to nothing much, this is complete crap, hit eject. And yet this film which had made me feel numb had unknowingly planted a seed in me. A few months later and I stumbled upon the Marvel comic book adaptation, by Archie Goodwin and Al Williamson - I knew these guys and their work on the Star Wars comics, so I just had to read this. It was brilliant. Really brilliant, way better than the film I thought. About two years passed and Blade Runner came to TV. Oh fuck it, I'd give it another go. I made sure I stole a new VHS cassette off my Dad and recorded it. And then something happened with this viewing, sure it was a bit disturbing and pretty violent, but it wasn't boring at all, in fact it was down right thrilling, especially the ending which made me shit myself. A few days later I made the mistake of recording over Blade Runner with The Black Hole. Fucking twat! Another couple of years went by and the movie was being shown at around midnight on a commercial station, great I can finally get this back on tape and wash away the memories of The Black Hole. My parents let me stay up to record it (I wanted to pause it during the adverts - so it looked like a proper copy you see) providing I kept the sound low. Now here's the thing, I'd only really properly seen Blade Runner once before now and this time the film affected me profoundly, I found it deep, moving and griping beyond anything I'd really seen before. Not only that I wanted to be in that world, that future forever. Since then the film has stayed with me and remains once of my all-time favourites. Just reading some of these comments seems I wasn’t alone in 'growing' up with Ridley Scott’s evergreen classic. Can't wait for the Final Cut by the way.

I'm pretty sure that there were three versions. The first "director's cut" was a few minutes shorter than the original release and contained less violence. Then there was the slightly shorter version, and finally the "Director's Cut" which has been disowned by Scott as a rush job.
Jesus, I had forgotten about that piece of cinematic shit called Megaforce. Saw it at the drive in stoned to the bone and just laughed and laughed. My eight year old brother thought it was cool though.
As for The Thing, "You gotta be fucking kidding me." One of the greatest lines ever, perfectly inserting a moment of humor into a scene that had me climbing up the back of my seat in terror.
Frankly,if I had to choose, I would pick The Thing over Bladerunner. It is a better film that represents the highest achievement of John Carpenter's career. So many scenes of greatness, the dogs, the spider head, and the interrupted CPR sequence. This was the Brimley performance of a lifetime, and Kurt was just as fucking cool as a cucumber. Russel would not achieve this level of brillance again until this year, where he just absolutely kicked ass in Grindhouse.
Interesting note about Bladerunner. The future seems to an America filled with Asian immigrants. We know now that in a decade California will be almost entirely populated by Hispanics as part of their reconquista of America. With the vast migration out of CA now taking place, it will be hard to find a single good Noodle house.

"It's all on the wheel, it all comes around!"
And it's true! As you say...
"This is one of the GREAT drunk party movies. Ive seen it a hundred times probably. Its crazy as a kid I thought it was a good movie. Then in my 20's I saw it again and realized what it really is. A cult camp comedy masquerading as a action movie."
Absolutely true... MEGAFORCE was a *FANTASTIC* cult camp comedy masquerading as a action movie!
And here's EXACTLY why...
Think back to the time you first saw this as a kid. What did you see? What did you feel?
Those of us lucky enough to witness this film as fresh faced 80's youngsters were treated to something sorely missing today...
A truly JOYFUL explosion of MANLY fun, adventure, ambition, hope, and BALLS.
When was the last time you felt all that SPEWING at you from a film?
I got the sense these guys just woke up one brightly sunny day and said, "Dammit! We're gonna make a monster crazy damn movie and love every frakkin' Manly second of it! Let's ROLL!!!!"
And by God they did!!!
Tell me you can't watch this movie and smell the absolute "WE DON'T GIVE A HAPPY FRAK!!!" attitude these guys went to work with everyday...
Tell me you didn't want to ride Mach 5 across a hot desert your badass, color changing Megabike...
Tell me you'd say no to 72 hours spent happy with your very best buds, lighting up those old world, old tech, and old fashioned badguys with your high tech lasers and your new wave rock music...
You KNOW this... They must've had the time of their LIVES out there in the desert back then.
Now, how many of us get ANYWHERE close to that level of REAL LIVING sitting in front of these plastic compu-boxes!
That RIGHT! Don't hate them because they're BEAUTIFUL!
Luckily for us, they went out and risked health, careers, and MERCILESS RIDICULE to make MEGAFORCE.
Because of them, our dreams were FIRED UP to ROILING BOIL as young men who DARED imagine our lives could be exciting, romantic, and MEANINGFUL.
Even better, as grown men NOW we can get NASTY drunk, watch this SINGULAR movie, and feel DESPERATELY ANGRY if we let those little man dreams slip away.
And then, with Ace Hunter, Cmdr MEGAFORCE, at our side, we can (nay WILL) go forth and FINALLY make something SPECIAL of our lives!
Hey, DON'T LAUGH!!! That Ace Hunter guy made no excuses for what he was...
He wore his gold tights TIGHT (like TO THE SKIN)... no padding here Supes!
And if wanted to be, say... REED RICHARDS... he would damn well wear his BIG BOLD HELVETICA "4" square in the middle of his Man chest (and NOT let it slip down and off to the lower left like SOME males... COUGH! GRUFFUDD!!)
FOR SHAME!!!!
Let's take back our MANHOOD! ACE HAS SHOWN US THE WAY!!! LET'S ROLL!!!!
On the other hand...
"Well, if it's a comfortable tour you're looking for, I have connections... at DisneyLand!"

As we all know, replicant’s have artificial implanted memories, and keep fake photographs as mementos of their ‘lives’. Right. Now just look at all those photos lying around Deckard’s apartment. What the fuck are they doing there? BIG CLUE ME THINKS.

and not only three:<p>1.) The famous workprint <p>2.) The San Diego sneak version <p>3.) The theatrical release <p>4.) The international cut <p>5.) The director's cut <p>Wanna know more? Read Paul M. Sammons great book "Future Noir - The Making of Blade Runner" (1996)

I know Alien & Blade Runner were both directed by Ridley Scott. Isn't interesting that for both The Nostromo & The Spinner. They use that same circular computer graphic, to nevigate liftoff and desend. Anyone ever notice that? Do Alien and Blade Runner take place in the same universe?

Disc.The original, with the voice over. The version I saw in the theatre about six times that year. I've seen the other versions, but the '82 one will always be the definitive version. My girl friend loved that movie. I lost her to cancer many years later and I'll always associate Rutger Hauers speech at the end with our relationship.

How can you love someone you just met? There are tons of chicks I'd like to pork, and have after just a few hours and few Jim Beam shots, but believe me, their was no love there buddy boy. And what was with that cyclops with the EMO haircut. I like my cyclops to have horns like in Sinbad.

To me its just a matter of opinion on whether Deckard is a replicant or not. But one hting that always stuck with me, even when I saw it for the first time when I was 14 was that all the replicants were called by their first names and all the humans were called by their last names. I dont know what that means, but its cool huh?

Seriously, Scott saying Dekard is a replicant pissed me off just like Verhoven saying Quaid was dreaming really pissed me off too. The fact these things are ambiguous is what makes them so great we don't want to know the answer because that robs us of our imagination about what the answers are.

For those who've never seen the film. You're gonna get the same feeling. What's the big deal? Yes the effects and look of the film are fantastic and still impress today. (Aside from the spinner that flies in front of the giant billboard. If you look closely the spinner is slightly transparent. you can see through it. That always botherd me.) You're in for one boring movie. Harrison seems half asleep in this film. There's more talking than anything else and the story isn't even that interesting. The message at the end though is what makes it memorable, but mostly it's a slow going ride.

Is the Stop Motion tentacle beast towards the end. The rest is absolutely sick as fuck perfect! Watched it with my mum when I was a nipper. Also had a birthday Party and uncle Chuck's Invasion USA got stuffed in the VHS after all my little bitch friends booed Blade Runner off in favour of the bearded Ginger Ninja!? I watched Ridleys masterpiece(tied with Alien) alone later and even though it confused the fuck out of me It was a defining moment in me loving movies that la'l bit more than most of my mates.<P>He's a replicant. The constant Unicorn motifs and the fact Ridley said 'He's a Replicant'.

Well written.
I agree with the slop that is being churned out at the moment, where's the effort? Keep in mind these films were done way before CG was the norm. thus relied on skillful story telling and acting (and directing) - people who say BR is boring or over-rated are spoonfed explosions and grqphics 24-7 and don't understand the power of restraint and care.
I'll take Br over ID4, I Robot, or Phantom Menace anyday.

No. If he is a Replicant then the entire theme of the film is destroyed. Deckard has eliminated the rest of the Replicants, and the only reason he hasn't eliminated Roy yet is because he hasn't been able to. Yet when Roy has the chance to eliminate Deckard, he doesn't. He saves his life, he shows compassion, he becomes more "more human than a human". More human than Deckard.

On this glorious day, MEGAFORCE once again regained precious lost ground in our cluttered collective consciousness. (Thank you MR_INCREDIBLE!)<p>
Even so, and despite all our wonderful efforts, this good thing will fleet as all good things must. (S:AAB? SOB!)<p>
So, before we turn our big hairy back on this august event for the "pleasures" of the daily grinder, why not take this same moment to celebrate 2 who've never lost that MEGAFORCE faith?<p>
Of course I speak of...<p>
mr. brownstone! Who above followed up on his excellent "MEGAFORCE coming to DVD!" talkback post on this very site from way back in May 2003.<p>
Here's what he told us that day...<p>
"This is one of the best films ever made by the human race. I'm gonna celebrate by making a Megaforce cake and decorating it with my Megaforce Hotwheels toys, then ramming my face into it."<p>
BANG!!! Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!<p>
And let's not forget the "Ace" who started that historic MEGAFORCE AICN thread...<p>
YES! It's Mr. Harry "BLADE 2 is the tongue, mouth, fingers and lips of a lover" Knowles!!!<p>
Fearless Leader's feelings say what we aren't nearly brave enough to say...<p>
"Ya see, there are titles of such a deep personal interest to me that... well... it makes me all teary-eyed just thinking about it."<p>
DAMN STRAIGHT!!!<p>
So, what do you say... How do we salute these true believers in a manner that befits?<p>
I vote thusly...<p>
We kiss our thumbs, throw em' up in the air, and wave them madly like we JUST DON'T CARE!!!<p>
Because you know... "The good guys always win, even in the 80's!"<p>
Go see the original "MEGAFORCE coming to DVD!" article and talkback now at...<p>
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/15313

I saw that movie when I was a kid, up until this talkback I thought it was delta force I had seen for some reason! But it must have been megaforce as I remember the flying bike so clearly. Damn I need to see that movie again!

I think they still hold up. The movie has an intensity that CGI would just ruin. Practical f/x worked and still hold up in that film. What no one ever gives The Thing credit for is its timeless "look". There are no terribly dated haircuts or clothing to "date" the movie and the cinematography can't be beat. The movie still feels fresh today and is 20X better than most horror films released SINCE then.

This movie is too dark, and I'm not referring to the setting, or the tone, or the characters.<p>
I'm talking about the fact that you cant see anything thats going on in the movie because they lit all the sets with Coleman flashlights.

...with an Asimov twist. Kinda. Depending on who you speak with.<P>Is it truly that original after all?<P>Don't get me wrong. I love the flick. It's fantastic for all the reasons Merrick and others have accounted for here on TB. I point to Blade Runner and the Thing as the last movies to utilize 'true' special effects grounded in reality (i.e. non-CGI) that really felt organic. And it's WAAY better than most movies released this decade if not this year.<P>BUT...! It remains an ultimately derivative narrative from superior sources. Again, how is it anything but a collusion of Logan's Run and I, Robot mixed with just a touch of Columbo?<P>Yes, Blade Runner is great. But it's not GREAT!!<P>Tron deserves way more praise.

The Thing is always felt real to me. There was no alien in a rubber suit, no UFO in the sky. It wasn't set in a major city. No army is called in. It was just these men in the artic doing their job and they happen to run into this thing. a thing they can't explain. it's somekind of organism they're dealing with.

...the best combination of VISUALS and MUSIC ever put on film. Both visuals and score are top notch in their own right...but together it is simply ashtonishing. Add all of the many layered story points and concepts listed above by Merrick and you have the greatest film ever...in my book anyway:)

Probably one of the only films in HISTORY that didn't have a single woman in the cast (or on screen). The only female (kinda) seen in the movie is on the "Let's Make A Deal" episode that is shown playing on the tv in the background.

...'cos if he was then he'd have super-strength and agility like Roy and the others, right? He get's beaten up several times, broken fingers etc.. he's clearly not as strong as the replicants he's stalking. What gives?

I agree. Harrison Ford was 100% correct when he said it made no sense for Deckard to be a replicant. The point of the movie was to show a real-man who was dead inside hunting fake-men who taught him how precious life is. He grew to love life so much, he gave up his lifestyle to run away with a fugitive and find whatever brief happiness they could make together. The broken Deckard at the beginning of the movie who whined about his ex-wife calling him "Sushi" would never have done that, he had given up on life. Follow Ridley Scott's artsy-fartsy ideas and you lose that whole beautiful story, to gain what? As Ford said, "Make Deckard a replicant and the audience will have no one to care about."

Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life, anybody's life, my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where did I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die.

You either interpret it the way YOU like it. End of story. Sure, it's a cool debate to kick around in the TB...but it a film to be ENJOYED, not analyzed like the Zapruder film. I personally like both versions...a little more fond of the directors cut...but have no problem with the narration. Never understood why people thought it was SO bad. In one he's NOT a replicant...in the other he IS.

Quite honestly fellahs, you CAN argue both ways.......Deckard COULD very well be a replicant, even with the physical limitations...ie, the FINALLY constructed a replicant indistinguishable from a human....the unicorn shot would seem to be a confirmation of this....but how do we know that Deckard never told anyone about that reverie? The theme of a human's redemption is shot with this theory, however. I always chose to take Gaff's origami as a message to Deckard.....chase your dreams, man.....So I prefer my Replicants ambiguous....hey, maybe they're ALL replicants, having replace humans centuries ago and recreating the "present" (for them) over and over....it's like 3019, and they don't know 'cause they keep recreating the cycle....you see where I'm going with this? One of the most beautiful things about Blade Runner is that it contains SO MANY points of debate....Final cut finally drops october this year, and will contain FIVE different versions, so everyone can have their own preferred version.....me? I might just do some splicing, and do my own damn cut.......

Sorry, but no one, including Ridley "I have no idea how many replicants came to Earth" Scott will ever convince me that Deckard was a replicant. It was just bad math, a deleted scene and continuity errors that made this whole speculation possible. The unicorn at the end? That was Gaff's reason for letting Rachael escape: she's the unique replicant that has implanted memories and an "unlimited" lifespan. Deckard as a replicant just doesn't make ANY sense. Replicants aren't allowed on Earth, "under penalty of death." Deckard has hunted replicants for years, certainly longer than a "4 year life-span". To say he's a replicant is just asinine and moronic...(sorry, Ridley!)

Seriously, I LOVE Blade Runner, but I'd still like to see a direct translation of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" complete with Mercerism, Buster Friendly, and Iran (Deckard's wife). In fact, I think it would make a pretty fucking awesome mini-series or TV series. Stick to the book, and you'd have a huge hit for the clever folks out there.

And it looked amazing. The print was near perfect and the film definitely held up - visual effects, music, story. The Aero Theater in Santa Monica showed it as a double with Cat People. The night before they ran Poltergeist with Creepshow and the night after they played Tron (70mm) and Star Trek 2! It was incredible. They even had crew members and cast from the movies to talk after the movies! *** Anyway, back to The Thing... I did not see the film in 1982, but I did see Blade Runner and E.T. I was only 10, but Blade Runner totally worked for me even then. Of course, I didn't pick up on all the subtleties of the story and themes, but I was blown away by the world on-screen. From the opening crawl and titles, to the couple escaping the city at the end. I even liked the voice-over and still do. For many years, I owned the laserdisc and taped the movie onto cassette tape so I could listen to its incredible soundtrack while driving! They sound design is just that good.
Oh, and one last bit - there are at least three versions of the film I have seen. The third version is unavailable today, but was released by Criterion on laserdisc in the early 90s. It was an unrated version and had longer cuts of some scenes. When Pris is shot by Deckard, he shoots her three times, not twice. When Batty puts the nail through his hand, you see it actually pierce his skin and come out the other side. And the best part, is when Tyrell is killed, you see Batty's fingers go all the way into Tyrell's eye sockets and deep red blood oozes out! Still had voice over and the happy ending.
I love these films. Thanks for the great review!

Two very good films. Blade Runner is definitely a grower. I wasn't all that taken with it as first, but it's one of those films you find yourself going back to again and again, and then one day you realise you love it. Also, I've always enjoyed the ambiguity of not knowing whether Deckard is a replicant. It makes more sense in the context of the story to NOT know, since what the film is saying is that none of us know how much time we have left. It's a mystery.<p>And The Thing, which is one of my favourites, and one of the few pure horror films I really love. You should really sit and watch the film in one sitting, soak up that atmosphere and whatnot.

1.) He dreams about the unicorn and later Gaff leaves an origami unicorn at Deckard's home. The only way that Gaff could've known about the unicorn is because he knows which kind of dreams are implemented in the new replicants (=Deckard) - just like Deckard knows the implemented memories of Rachael. <p>2.) Only the Nexus-6 replicants have a 4-year lifespan. Deckard is not necessarily a Nexus-6. 3.) Gaff gives another 2 hints that he knows that Deckard is a replicant. First: In the final scene on the roof he says to Deckard: "You've done a man's job, Sir", meaning man=human (as opposed to Deckard not being human). In the same scene he says: "It's too bad she won't live - but then again, who does?", meaning Deckard won't live, too.<p>For me it's clear that Deckard is a replicant - but only in the director's cut. The theatrical cut is far more ambiguous and much more optimistic. That's why I prefer the director's cut :-)

Couldn't you also argue that by saying "You've done a man's job, sir" he's saying that Deckard is, in fact, a man? <p>Also, suggesting that Deckard won't live doesn't mean he's a robot. All of us humans die in the end, don't we?<p>I'm not saying you're wrong, by the way. Just that these things can be looked at from both sides, and that it's the ambiguity that makes it interesting.

Flying cars!<p>When the hell are we going to get those? What's the point of living in the twenty-first century if we're not going to work in our spinners? Or, at the very least, some kind of jet pack?<p>I wouldn't say no to a sexbot, either...

"Skin Job", that is. The original theatrical release, which I saw in the theaters with my Mom, just the two of us in an empty theater,(Yes, it WAS a bit of a bomb on the initial release) is the version that I remember the most. And that version is much less indicative of Deckard being a Replicant. The director's cut is much more ambiguous about it. I was disappointed with the film when I saw it at age 12, as well. It wasn't until I was 19 that I really understood and appreciated what the film was all about. (and the 12 year old also went expecting to see Han Solo in a different Star Wars film; boy was THAT disappointing!) But even as a kid I was overwhelmed by the SFX. Douglas Trumbul should have gotten an Oscar! (damn you, E.T.!) I'm pretty sure I saw it in 70mm at the Robert E. Lee theater in New Orleans: the screen was HUGE! Whatever Deckard's Skin-Job status, Blade Runner is, without a doubt, the most influential Sci-Fi film of the last 25 years! (now bring on the sequel!) The only movie on these lists so far that I didn't see in the theater in '82 was The Thing. I didn't see it until it was on HBO years later. I guess I couldn't convince my Mom to take me to see that particular R-Rated film. (But I saw every other movie on the '82 list with her: thanks, Mom!)

Any one know when MetalStorm and the Deadly Spawn coming out on DVD? These are the two great films of 1983. Bladerunner? ET? The Thing? PFFST! Please! Trash, the lot of them. I know MetalStorm will miss the 3d effects that made watching it in the theater such an experience, but it is still a landmark film. Movies from Mad Maxx: beyond Thunderdome to tv shows like Firefly all ripped it off. And Deadly Spawn? Still gives me nightmares. Aliens 3 it a total rip off it, as well as Cabin Fever and Slither.

I haven't seen the original theatrical release since probably 1990...but I was more than game for rewatching my Director's Cut DVD last night after reading Merrick's reminiscence. I watched for any sign's relevant to Deckard being either a replicant or just a man. The two things that stood out the most in favor of his being a replicant were in a shot at around 1:40 his eyes had that internal glow that Priss's, Roy's, Rachel's and the owl's eyes had. And most convincing was when he is looking at the picture that Rachel brings to prove she's human, for a brief second it animates...indicating that this image is an implanted memory for Deckard as well. To me this means, at least in the Director's Cut, Deckard is a replicant.

Somebody mentioned this film. This is the best Norris film (not saying much) and I haven't seen it in years. It was a hard assed film, with two of the most sickening scenes ever filmed. The first was the Christmas attack on the cul de sac with the rocket launchers, just terrorists blowing up a neighborhood for no good reason at all. The second was when the bad guy smashes the face of a woman doing blow with a metal straw, which goes into her face. He then throws her out a window. Great stuff. Certainly a much better and more memorable film than Megaforce.
Still, Red Dawn is the classic of the USA invasion films (the other notable being the ABC miniseries Amerika) Remember how brillant John Millius was? Watched his "Rough Riders" the other day and was just blown away. I know he produced "Rome" but I don't think he wrote any of the episodes or directed. Hard to say what his input was.

6 Replicants, 3 male, 3 female. Two are captured and "reprogramed" to help flush out the other four.(it's why Roy knew Deckard's name)<p>Yeah, I think that's bullshit too. Still it's fun to think about.<p>BTW, multicolored-getaway-smoke from dozens of Megaforce vehicles, is full of WIN!

This is truly amazing technology. I saw "Nightmare" last year and it was amazing, as was "Meet the Robinsons". What is great is that there is no eye strain whatsoever. Also, the 3D is used to enhance the experience of watching the films, not for cheap effects. Mostly what you get is a much greater sense of depth perception. Particularly in the case of "Nightmare" which used three dimensional sets and characters, the technology is amazing. It is much better even than IMAX 3D. I have to drive an hour to get to the nearest theater with the 3D projector, its digital by the way, and it is well worth the trip. I hear they are doing "Titanic" using the technology and I can't wait. Oh, and before "Robinsons" they showed an old Disney cartoon and it looked just the way it should have looked, great, just great.

No. If you follow the initial scene where Deckard gets the lowdown, one replicant was retired before the film began. It was caught breaking into Tyrell.Deckard is definitely NOT a replicant. The story falls apart if he is.

I bought the HD-remastered DVD of "The Thing" about 2 months ago, and holy shit do the effects hold up! They remastered the film so well it looks and sounds like it was filmed yesterday. Incredible. The fucked up transformation sequences are scarier, grizzlier, and more alien than anything released in the CG age. "The Descent" had some nice sequences, and so did a few other films, but "The Thing" owns them all for brutally gross alien body horror. In my opinion, at least. Anyone who hasn't seen the HD-remastered version of "The Thing" really should check it out. Blew my mind.<p>
I enjoyed "Blade Runner: The Director's Cut" more than the theatrical release. The atmosphere of "Blade Runner" is what I most enjoyed about it. The hulking skyscrapers, millions of twinkling lights and advertisments everywhere, integrated languages (an idea ahead of its time), and a jagged corporate agenda controlling everything. Interesting how this last point has absolutely come to fruition.<p>
Good films, both! Thanks Merrick.

...when thou suggests "bring on the sequel!" in regard to Blade Runner. If not, please do not type such ruminations here. Some idiot out there in Hollywood might just take you up and that...or worse...a remake!

after you finish this series of 1982 talkbacks which i nostalgilove, you should start on 1981: Raiders, Mad Max 2, The Evil Dead, Das Boot, Escape from New York, Excalibur, American Werewolf in Paris, Time Bandits, Outlsnd, Stripes, Halloween 2, Body Heat, Gallipoli, History of the World Part I, Friday the 13th II, Clash of the Titans, Scanners, Nighthawks, and some others too. 1980-1982 has to be the best 3 years for genre filmmaking ever

That jumped out at me when I saw achival footage of NYC in the winter circa 1981. Everyone on the street who was under 30 wore ski-jackets or parkas. By 1984-85 you saw more and more long overcoats, and by 1990 they were everywhere.-----later-----m

I always loved Blade Runner as a kid. Even then I was impressed by its vision and creativity. It was only a few short years later Burton ripped it off (badly) for Batman. By then its growing influence was already being felt. A friend of mine pointed out that Scott never really made a film on the level of BR ever again. I think that's true. Parts of Legend measure up visually and obviously he's made some great movies since but none on that level. The Thing I didn't see until I was 15 but I loved it then. And years later when my brother finally got around to it he was blown away too. I've gone back to it time and again. That and Out of Sight were the first films I bought on DVD. I just watched it the other week. It's usually the first movie I pick to show a girl since its scary and usually they haven't seen it. Considering the last girl I showed it to was born in 1984 and the other was born in '85 its also usually a safe bet they havent seen it. And also viewing it through their eyes you see how well it holds up so I have to disagree with Merrick. Other then the computers the film looks timeless. I always watch the girls during the blood test. BAM! One of the best scares ever. Perhaps Carpenter's best looking film and an astonishing screenplay filled with great actors with great faces (not pretty boys but MEN) who clearly knew they were in a good movie. A Masterpiece. A few years back Creative Screenwriting featured The Thing on the cover with a retrospective of the screenplay. The next issue had a letter saying something like: "Thanks for the article on The Thing. Some of us have been saying since it was released what a great movie it is." Then it was signed Frank Darabont. The other great thing about both these films is they are unabashedly genre films and illustrate what is great about genre films. How you dont have to look down your nose at them and say "its all about the characters. its not really sci-fi. blah blah". Ford and Hitchcock didn't apologize for making westerns or thrillers. I just watched the interviews on the Black Christmas DVD. The original ONE. And Margot Kidder noted how she had worked with all these famous directors behind and in front of the camera who were supposed to change cinema and did this movie to pay the bills and yet which one are they talking about 30 years later? I think that speaks a lot to what film really means to people and to the kind of films that really do have something to say like Thing and Blade Runner. They were obviously dismissed as dank, boring, BAD movies all those years ago by audiences and critics. Precisely for the very things we love about them now. Look at all the debate they generated right here. Is he a replicant etc.? Which one is the Thing? Oh and I do have to say...I LOVE Megaforce. One of the proudest moments of my filmmaking career (such as it is) was Hal Needham being at the screening of my short film at a film festival. He was a bad ass. And gave my film a hilarious two line review: "You made one mistake. Shoulda made it longer". Alright enough rambling. I'll close by saying the posters for BOTH these movies are hanging on my walls even as I write this.

SpookyOtaku: Ring the movie is also much better in every way than Ring the book (I don´t doubt stuff was lost in the Japanese-English translation...but still).
Prossor: You mean American Werewolf in London. American Werewolf in Paris came out in the 90´s and the FX looked so bad I (and pretty much everyone else) refuse to ever see it. It´s pretty cool that so many have had the same experience with Bladerunner (seen it as a kid, dind´t like it, gave it another chance as adults and loved it). I got the chance to see The Thing a couple of years back with a couple of friends (I had seen the movie a couple of times since I was 11 and my friends had never seen it) an that was very sweet. Seeing one of my friends jumping out of his seat during the "blood test" and seeing his expression whe the movie ended was priceless.